Skip to content
Compare Whitecaps vs Earthquakes

Whitecaps vs Earthquakes Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

Compare Whitecaps vs Earthquakes: head-to-head stats, recent form, goals, defensive record and strength indicators from last matches.

Whitecaps Whitecaps Home Team
Earthquakes Earthquakes Away Team
Whitecaps
49.4
W L W D D L W L W D

Last 10 Matches

Earthquakes
31.1
L L L L D L W L L D

Performance Radar

Whitecaps
Earthquakes

Categories Won

9

Whitecaps

3

Draw

3

Earthquakes

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
40%

4W, 3D, 3L

10%

1W, 2D, 7L

Goals Scored / Match
1.9

19 / 10 matches

1.3

13 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.2

12 / 10 matches

2.6

26 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
+7

+7

-13

-13

Clean Sheet
30%

3 / 10 matches

0%

0 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
40%

4 / 10 matches

70%

7 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
50%

5 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
B. White (4 goals)
P. Judd (4 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 10 / 2nd Half: 9
1st Half: 8 / 2nd Half: 5
Home Win Rate
33%

1W / 3 matches

0%

0W / 6 matches

Away Win Rate
43%

3W / 7 matches

25%

1W / 4 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
41.0

League Difficulty: 55.0, Opponent Quality: 54.3

53.1

League Difficulty: 55.0, Opponent Quality: 51.8

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 1 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
2.0

Actual: 1.9 | Diff: -0.1

1.26

Actual: 1.3 | Diff: +0.04

Adjusted Power Rating
49.4

Attack: 57.6, Defense: 54.6, Form: 36.4

31.1

Attack: 44.7, Defense: 13.7, Form: 10.3

Goal Timing Analysis

2

0-15'

5
5

16-30'

3
2

31-45'

2

46-60'

2
4

61-75'

2
4

76-90+'

1
Whitecaps
Earthquakes
Whitecaps

Power Rating Breakdown

49.4

Overall

Attack 57.6
Defense 54.6
Form 36.4
Consistency 50.5
Earthquakes

Power Rating Breakdown

31.1

Overall

Attack 44.7
Defense 13.7
Form 10.3
Consistency 74.5

Strength of Schedule

Measures the difficulty of opponents faced. Higher = tougher schedule.

League Difficulty

55.0 vs 55.0

Opponent Quality

54.3 vs 51.8

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Whitecaps logo Whitecaps
W
Dallas (53%)
L
Houston (65%)
W
Sounders (36%)
D
LAFC (53%)
D
Minnesota (50%)
L
Cincinnati (61%)
W
San Diego (59%)
L
Houston (70%)
Earthquakes logo Earthquakes
L
Minnesota (45%)
L
Galaxy (49%)
L
St. Louis (68%)
L
Cincinnati (61%)
D
Galaxy (44%)
L
Orlando (49%)
W
Portland (58%)
L
Dallas (53%)

Opponent Quality: Quality blends league strength, recent points form, goal difference, and home/away context. It is not only club size or reputation.

Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Dallas H
5 - 0 W
53%
Houston H
0 - 1 L
65%
Sounders A
2 - 0 W
36%
LAFC H
1 - 1 D
53%
Minnesota A
0 - 0 D
50%
Cincinnati A
3 - 4 L
61%
San Diego A
4 - 2 W
59%
Houston A
0 - 1 L
70%
Dallas A
3 - 2 W
58%
Earthquakes A
1 - 1 D
38%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Minnesota H
1 - 5 L
45%
Galaxy A
0 - 1 L
49%
St. Louis H
1 - 3 L
68%
Cincinnati A
2 - 4 L
61%
Galaxy H
1 - 1 D
44%
Orlando H
0 - 4 L
49%
Portland A
3 - 1 W
58%
Dallas H
2 - 3 L
53%
Sounders A
2 - 3 L
36%
Whitecaps H
1 - 1 D
55%

AI Analysis

Raw output from both teams looks comparable at first glance, yet once we account for Strength of Schedule, a clear hierarchy emerges. The favorite has repeatedly risen to the challenge against higher-caliber opponents, underlining a genuine quality advantage.

Earthquakes has earned their numbers the hard way, posting a SoS of 53.1 against considerably stronger competition than Whitecaps (SoS: 41.0). Their figures deserve greater analytical credence as a result — forged against genuinely difficult opponents.

Offensively, Whitecaps outperforms Earthquakes with 1.9 goals per match to 1.3, though the margin leaves the contest genuinely open.

The numbers tell a compelling defensive story for Whitecaps — 1.2 goals conceded per game and 3 clean sheets put them well ahead of Earthquakes, who give up 2.6 goals per match at the other end.

Earthquakes has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Based on the combined statistics, expect 3.5 total goals. Over 2.5 goals is the statistical lean, with BTTS (Both Teams to Score) being likely.

📈 Form Momentum: Whitecaps has been remarkably consistent, maintaining a steady 1.5 points per game over their last 10 matches. This stability makes them a predictable but reliable force.

❄️ Form Momentum: Earthquakes is struggling for form, winning just 1 of their last 10 matches. Teams in this state often lack the confidence to compete in tight moments.

📊 Key Trend: The form trajectories are diverging. Whitecaps is on the rise with 4W in last 10, while Earthquakes shows signs of decline with 1W in last 10.

💡 Why This Matters: The 18.3-point power rating gap between these teams translates to approximately a 85% win probability for Whitecaps. In practical terms, Whitecaps would win 8 out of 10 such matchups.

Whitecaps emerges as the favorite in this matchup. With a stronger overall power rating (49.4 vs 31.1) and advantages in key areas, they should have enough to prevail.

These two teams drew 1-1 in the US Major League Soccer (2026-05-10). The stalemate suggests these sides are closely matched, and another tight contest could be on the cards. With the previous match ending in a draw, neither side holds a psychological edge. Both teams will feel they have a genuine chance of winning.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Whitecaps

Whitecaps

VS
Earthquakes

Earthquakes

In H2H (head-to-head) matchups, to eliminate momentary fluctuations and coincidences, we limit our analyses to an optimal depth of exactly 10 matches. Neither less, nor more. This focused approach is our undisputed gold standard, revealing the tactical and psychological supremacy teams hold over each other in its purest form. We do not dwell on the noise of the past; we concentrate on the millimetric precision of current form.

Compare Another Pair

Comparison Summary

This head-to-head comparison analyzes the last 10 matches of each team, evaluating attack power, defensive strength, form consistency, and overall performance metrics. The power ratings are calculated using a weighted algorithm that considers goals scored, goals conceded, win rate, and recent form trends.

Whitecaps

4W 3D 3L · 19 goals scored · 12 conceded

Earthquakes

1W 2D 7L · 13 goals scored · 26 conceded

Popular Teams

We use cookies & local storage to enhance your experience. Learn more

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or